B.P.SENGUPTA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 25.6.1999 passed by Sri K.K Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur in CI case No. 46 of 1999 whereby cognizance against the petitioners for the. offence under Section 304 -A, IPC was taken by the learned Court below. The main ground advanced by the petitioners in support of their prayer is that continuance of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners, which was initiated on the basis of the complaint filed by the opposite - party No. 2, amounts to gross abuse of the process of the Court, as because even on reading the entire allegations and averments contained in the complaint petition, no offence whatsoever, much less for the offence under Section 304 -A, IPC, is made out against the present petitioners.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

(3.) THE background of the case stated briefly, is that the case was registered on the basis of the complaint filed by the opposite party No. 2 alleging therein that the petitioner No. 1 is the doctor employed and posted at Tata Main Hospital, Jamshedpur. On 10.9.1998 the complainant's husband who was suffering from pain in his abdomen, was admitted to the hospital as indoor patient and was placed under the surgery unit of" Dr. B.P.Sengupta (petitioner No. 1). The petitioner No. 2 is the General Manager of the Medical Services of Tata Main Hospital. It is alleged that the complainant's husband was provided with medical treatment by the hospital on payment from 10.9.1998 to 15.9.1998 and finally discharged from the hospital on 15.9.1998 without any diagnosis, though with a suggestion that the patient should undergo ultrasound examination outside the hospital and was also advised to consult a general surgeon outside the hospital. After discharge from the hospital, the patient continued to survive for about four days, but on 18.9.1998 he developed acute pain in his abdomen and on being admitted to the hospital, he was declared brought dead at the emergency ward of the hospital. The complainant has alleged that the petitioner No. 1 who was the doctor at the hospital under whom her husband was undergoing treatment, had committed gross negligence in performance of his duty on account of his failure to diagnose the ailment of the patient and to give proper medical treatment to him, as a result of which, the ailment for which the patient earlier was admitted to the hospital, continued to persist and eventually proved fatal. It is alleged that the accused Nos. 2 and 3 are equally responsible for the negligence of the petitioner No. 1 at the hospital and for the consequent death of the complainant's husband. After examining the complainant and her witnesses on solemn affirmation, the learned Court below vide its order dated 25.6.1999, proceeded to take cognizance of the offence under Section 304 -A, IPC after recording its finding that a prima facie case is made out for such offence.